Good Progress

[AnonyMouse_4562]

Could I ask what is classed as 'good' progress? Getting mixed messages - is it moving securely from one age and stage to the next within 3 terms or would they have to progress further than a whole age and stage?

Thanks

Green Hippo x

[Guest]

Good progress according to my head is at least 4 points progress on the profile over the course of the year.

When we had ofsted last year the inspector asked why my children has only over from 30-50 to 40-60 months and I asked where else they could move from and to ?!!!!

Deb

[AnonyMouse_4562]

That's exactly my point! Unless you have a class with a number of children coming in working below their expected age and stage and show them to move more than one age band then how do you show 'good' progress and this is going to be made no easier with the new profile.

I'm doing the assessment for our LA at the moment and we have to give for each aspect 1 point for (secure in) 22-36, 2 points for (secure in) 30-50, and 3 points for (secure in) 40-60 months. I'm in Nursery so average is 2s for each aspect but what I am now finding is that as there is no 'points' available for children working well within 40-60 it is basically impossible to show the children that are above average unless they have actually already achieved the early learning goals. So the child who is ready to start working within 40-60 is "statistically" appearing at the same level as the child who is working well within 40-60 months and starting to get near the ELGs.

It basically proves that whatever number system we use it just doesn't work for young children!!!

Green Hippo x

[Guest]

i understood that it was, say moving from 30-50 emerging to 40-60 emerging, as age -related expectations for nursery on entry is 30-50 and 40-60 for reception, on entry. obviously, if a child is 30-50 at start of nursery and 40-60 at end of year then this does not necessarily show good progress, as they could have been 30-50 secure and only 40-60 emerging at end of year, meaning that they have made poor progress. so i think it means making a 'year's' progress from their personal starting point. so if a child starts at 22-36 months only emerging (i.e. having only achieved a very few of the statements in that development band), then if they were at 30-50 emerging at the end of the year, then this is expected progress. hope you get me! however, is expected progress now only satisfactory? good probably means better than expected as it's all changed again with ofsted judgements!!! hope this has not confused you more. don't you just love jumping through all these hoops................

[Guest]

We look at 3 profile points progress from beg to end of reception as expected (good - or should it just be satisfactory?) progress, 3 points on entry would be a good starting point, and 6 is meant to be good achievement at end therefore we look for 3 points progress, even it is from1 to 4, or from 4 to 7. But this age related does my head in, they could enter reception emerging 40-60, and leave secure 40-60 - expected age related throughout - is this good or would they be expected to achieve beyond? And as someone has commented, next year's profile is possibly going to be tricky to show progress without divvying up a points system to try and create magic formulas which are not really meant to exist.

[AnonyMouse_3307]

It's not all about attainment. It's also about increasing the % of children who reach age related expectations or better.

 

For example, you have 60% children who are emerging 40 - 60+ on entry with a tail of possible underachievement behind them of 60%. If they all made the same rate of progress - generally satisfactory, then you'd have 60% working securely in the ELGs or at expected level of development. ie no added value.

Now if you targetted those 40% and got 20% more of them to make better than satisfactory progress so you now have 80% who are at age related expectations than when you started, then you've narrowed the gap, reduced risk of further underachievement and this could be argued to be good progress.

 

The same thinking will apply with the new EYFS/EYFSP. children's progress can be easily matched to the ages and stages, many use a simple best fit of emerging, developing, securing to show development through the developmental band. The EYFSP will now hinge around expected levels of development at the end of the key stage and is "less about progress and more about summative attainment" now. (Words of STA lead, not me!).

 

Cx

[Guest]

I was wondering about, in terms of Reception.... emerging =1, expected 2 and exceeding 3 against the ELGS. You would then be able to create 17 scores and measure progress during the year. But how would you measure what had gone before the ELGs?

Only way i can think of it at the moment is to use these 3 point scores at each age band from 0- 40-60, so they could score 18 points(6 bands x3) in each of 17 aspects = 306

Surely measuring progress involves some kind of data tool and therefore we have to translate our highlighting of LJs and Dev. matters into a numerical score in order to be able to measure progress from 0-5?.

 

Or do we turn the ages into A-F and the emerging etc. into level 1, 2, 3. So you are 'best fit' E2 in 'Making Relationships' etc but how do you measure that on a computer?

 

Or is this exactly want they don't want us to do with it BUT how do we show measured progress to OFSTED?

I wish they would give us a tool when they create these things rather then us all going mad trying to work out how to do the same thing!

 

Perhaps I should add my thoughts to our forum section that the government department look at?? Are you listening Michael??

[AnonyMouse_8466]

Good progress according to my head is at least 4 points progress on the profile over the course of the year.

What approach will your head take now that the profile points have been scrapped?

[AnonyMouse_3307]

I was wondering about, in terms of Reception.... emerging =1, expected 2 and exceeding 3 against the ELGS. You would then be able to create 17 scores and measure progress during the year. But how would you measure what had gone before the ELGs?

Only way i can think of it at the moment is to use these 3 point scores at each age band from 0- 40-60, so they could score 18 points(6 bands x3) in each of 17 aspects = 306

Surely measuring progress involves some kind of data tool and therefore we have to translate our highlighting of LJs and Dev. matters into a numerical score in order to be able to measure progress from 0-5?.

 

Or is this exactly want they don't want us to do with it BUT how do we show measured progress to OFSTED?

 

 

I'd say don't start getting tied up with point scores that don't exist anymore! The goal in its entirety is the descriptor of the expected level of development at the end of the EYFS. If a child is not yet at that Expected level as described by the exemplification (yet to be published) and the goal, then no matter where they are on the dev matters continuum they will be summatively assessed as being Emerging at the time of the EYFSP, for the purposes of reporting the outcome to the LA/DfE.

 

For me, tracking progress is just a matter of detailing a child's progression along the continuum of the ages/stages towards the ELG, across the eyfs now and relating this to age related expectations and distance between summative judgements along the way. Just as we have measured progress with nursery children using the ages/stages doing so for reception children should be the way forward!! What is the % of your cohort on track, below or above expectations would be numerical data. Increase the % and you are narrowing the gap. That is more the data Ofsted are interested in.

Cx

[Guest]

 

What approach will your head take now that the profile points have been scrapped?

 

Well we went to our local authority briefing together last week and heard all about how the revised EYFS will do away with points and point progress per child etc as Catma has outlined but my head like the rest of us at the meeting came away with so many questions unanswered. Everyone at that meeting needed and wanted to see the exemplars of the three 'e's and some sort of idea of how we would record this at the end of the year but we obviously have to wait which is very unsettling. All the changes made seem sensible and designed to help teachers but i cannot believe that the revised eyfs will do away with counting points and data to track individual progress. if the government don't provide a system then i believe someone will as that way of working is so ingrained! As a school we track every single child's progress every half term and the head and deputies meet with teachers to talk about each individual child, the progress made and what needs to happen to support their learning. So data about individual children is used as well as class percentages. Whether this is part of the revised EYFS or not, it is what we will do. At the moment The rest of the school uses target tracker but up till now I have used iprofile. Target tracker is in the process of putting something together for the revised EYFS so it is likely we will be using that.

There was a deep concern from heads at the meeting that ofsted would not be in tune with the revised EYFS and I don't think that they will easily let go the old type systems for data until they are assured of that. ( our trainers did not allow questions so were not able to reassure or give any suggestions except wait for the materials in the autumn term!)

I will be highlighting against DM in sept for my starting point and will await further instructions.....!

Deb

[Guest LornaW]

I went to the Early Excellence conference in REading today and loved it. The theme was 'Holding onto Quality in a Time of Change

Redefining Effective Learning and Teaching in Early Years' and the message I came away with was we need to stand up for what we believe in and what is best for our children. Did you know they tried to introduce baseline in Wales but all of the teachers said no it was not appropriate and so it was not introduced!

 

For Ofsted ask what exeperience they have in EYs to be making judgements and offer them some case studies to show how children have progressed in your class. I would suggest a learning journal would be an excellent way to do this.

 

Please don't get tied up in knots inventing ways to make it work instead lets all unite and say this is not right for children who are often not yet 60months old when they are moving into Y1.

 

Rant over!!!

[Guest]

Okay, I like what you are saying Catma, improving the percentage at age expected and above.

And take your point Lorna.

 

My worry is in schools everything is measured on data and like someone else said, there are half-termly meetings where you need to demonstrate pupil progress.

If someone started Reception on band 22-36 months in something that would be'emerging' on entry. If by February they were 30-50 m that would still be 'emerging' and they would appear to have made no progress over 3 terms and would still not be part of the percentage who had increased to 'age expected'.

If you have progress meetings with your head 6 times a year you surely need a system that demonstrates these small steps within the 'emerging' band don't you?. Because actually if a kiddie went from 22-36 to 40-60 they would have made almost 2 years progress in a year which is surely 'good'?.

 

I understand how you report against the ELGs at the end of Reception, what I'm not so clear on is how you would create a system/spreadsheet that shows how children make progress through the dev. matters before the ELGs. And why would I want to do that? To be able to demonstrate the rate of progress to Headteacher as they are asked for it from Ofsted.

 

Catma, can you come and live inside my head for good advice on tap ??

[AnonyMouse_3307]

If someone started Reception on band 22-36 months in something that would be 'emerging' on entry. If by February they were 30-50 m that would still be 'emerging' and they would appear to have made no progress over 3 terms and would still not be part of the percentage who had increased to 'age expected'.

 

This would be so if you were trying to use the new EYFSP to measure progress. Emerging in the context of the EYFSP will be the reporting judgement for saying the child hasn't reached the expected level of development yet. But you need to be able to define where they are on the developmental matters ages/stages for your own school tracking. We don't use the expected level 2b to measure progress in key stage 1, and then track by continuously saying they aren't there yet, we say where they are on the levels of attainment before that. The EYFS will be just the same, except the bands are wider!

 

If a child was emerging at 22-36 months on entry to reception they would be well below expectations! However their progress can be measured by how far they have travelled from that point to where they are the next time you make a summative assessment. So if the next time they are now securing 22-36 they have made progress. They are still working within that developmental band, of course, so the summative judgement may stay the same but the progress is still there. If at the end of the eyfs they are still not at the ELG then they would be assessed as "Emerging".

 

Looking at summative assessments against a development band that is going to cover at least a year of development say 2 and a half (30months) to just over 4 years (50 months) and expect there to be big steps made in development in just half a term is a bit unhelpful in my humble opinion. Most of our schools summatively review progress termly so that there is a fighting chance the child will have moved from emerging to developing to secure across an academic year.

 

I'd also argue that If ofsted has been quite happy to understand the measure of progress in nursery classes using the EYFs framework they should be able to see the same across reception too!

 

cx

[Guest]

Thanks Catma. it's great to have you at our fingertips.

How would you record the progress on a grid 3 times a year through dev.matters?. Would you record Bob as emerging 30-50 in 'Writing' and then 'Expected 30-50' say the next term and i keep wondering what this would look like on a database e.g Bob: Writing E30-50 and then 'EX30-50' and then exceeding = 'EXC30-50' or is there a better way e.g 30-50a. 30-50b, 30-50 c etc?

 

Does everyone currently use some kind of computer programme to measure the jumps/steps of progress made (which would be impossible with this method) or do they sit there and manually work out the progress during nursery/reception (pre-profile)?

Am I trying to be too technical, does everyone just look at their highlighted sheets and not record it on a database?

[AnonyMouse_3307]

"Progress from age-related expectations at the beginning of nursery, to age-related expectations at the beginning of reception, on to the end of reception where they can be compared with Early Years Foundation Stage Profile national figures is likely to represent expected progress during the Early Years Foundation Stage."

 

Ofsted June 2012 - the updated Ofsted documents for Sept 2012

[Guest]

don't know if this is any use to anyone, but here it is anyway!! i am not very good with IT..... could be adapted for reception. i highlight green if at age related expectations i.e. 30-50 for beginning of nursery, yellow if two bands below, and red if three below. E indicates emerging, S means secure and rest in in the middle somewhere. we do summative in feb and most are green by then, and you can then see progress e.g. 26-26 E going to 30-50 E shows progress over half a year. unfortunately it does not break up the areas into aspects, but this could be done quite easily and will probably be my holiday job unless some fab person has done it already! mine goes with the worst aspect being the one given as current level in that aspect e.g. if writing is 22-36 E and reading is 22-36 S, we put them at 22-36 E, so showing worst really, and ofsted loved it

 

sep 2011.xls

[Guest]

God bless that one- I just needed to actually 'see' how someone els does it. Thank you.

[Guest]

i'll focus on one aspect per area of learning, then each half term in september, then all aspects will be covered twice or three times a year

[Guest]

Is this any use to any one .....

EYFS TRACKER_FS2.doc

[Guest]

I will be using 0-5 tracker to show progress and expect the majority of my children (not all in all areas) at the end of Reception, to be in 40-60 months, age related expectations. Some of these children will be in emerging 40-60, some developing and some secure. My query is, which ones will demonstrate age related expectations as far as the profile is concerned - I fear it will only be the ones who are secure, which will not look good...i.e my old 7s and 8s, where as a total of 6 was acceptable before, I feel my equivalent 6s next year will not match enough criteria to tick the new box?

Anyone understand where I am coming from?

[Guest]

Is this any use to any one .....

This looks good...my only concern is referring to children as lower attainers as it is not about attainment with young children - it is about their development. A summer born child could end up being described as a lower attainer!

[AnonyMouse_79]

Hi Heyjude, havent seen you about recently.

[Guest]

Thank you EmieJ - you are way ahead of me and that has saved me hours of head scratching!

As others above we report and discuss children half-termly - current system uses excel and shows most areas for each class for each period on one page - but I really like having a progressive view on one page for the whole year - fab!

[Guest]

My LA gave us a 'heads up' that OFSTED will expect children to be entering Year R at 40-60 months - that is age-related I know, but not my experience of new intake. Any one else heard this?

[Guest]

Yes, I was told that my Nursery children should be emerging 40-60 by the end of Nursery - regardless of where they started!

[AnonyMouse_19782]

My LA gave us a 'heads up' that OFSTED will expect children to be entering Year R at 40-60 months - that is age-related I know, but not my experience of new intake. Any one else heard this?

 

Do you believe that they meant these children had completed the 40-60 age band, or that they are working within it? Do they separate the 40-60 age band from the statements written in bold writing which are the early learning goals? We have so many mix ups in our county over this, I wish they would abolish it altogether. Surely teachers would be better served by a written report outlining the child's strengths and interests, rather than some indication that they are SOMEWHERE within an age band span which is so wide as to make it ridiculous. My parents focus their attention on the 40months part and we are forever trying to explain that their child is closer to the 60 months, but they still seem to think it something of an insult that their child should be "lumped" in this age band.

[AnonyMouse_3307]

Ofsted have previously defined age related expectations on entry to nursery as emerging 30 - 50 and then into reception as emerging 40 - 60+ in one of their guidance documents.

 

Cx